Abstract

We use a natural experiment — an unexpected judicial decision — to study how the legal enforceability of debt contracts affects consumer lending. In May 2015, a federal court unexpectedly held that the usury laws of three states — New York, Connecticut, and Vermont — applied to certain loans that market participants had assumed were exempt from those statutes. The case introduced substantial uncertainty about whether borrowers affected by the decision were under any legal obligation to repay principal or interest on their loans. Using proprietary data from three marketplace lending platforms, we use a difference-in-differences design to study the decision’s effects. We find no evidence that borrowers defaulted strategically as a result of the decision. However, the decision reduced credit availability for higher-risk borrowers in affected states. And secondary-market data indicate that the price of notes backed by above-usury loans issued to borrowers in affected states declined, particularly when those borrowers were late on their payments.

SSRN Rankings

About SSRN

We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content.By continuing, you agree to the use of cookies. To learn more, visit our Cookies page.
This page was processed by aws-apollo6 in 0.250 seconds